The beginning of the 2014 legislative session in Colorado has been busy, with well over 200 bills being introduced since opening day. One of these bills attempts to chip away at our state's support for marriage between one man and one woman by changing the tax code. Senate Bill 19, sponsored by Democratic Sen. Pat Steadman, is moving quickly through the legislative process. When Sen. St...

So let's have another vote - wanna bet which side wins this time. The tide had turned and same sex mariage is pretty much an accepted norm for civilized people these days. I am positive that the state that voted for President Obama, Senator Udahl, Senator Bennet, and Governor Hickenlooper will vote in favour of same sex mariage if you ask them again.

conniesz wrote:So let's have another vote - wanna bet which side wins this time. The tide had turned and same sex mariage is pretty much an accepted norm for civilized people these days. I am positive that the state that voted for President Obama, Senator Udahl, Senator Bennet, and Governor Hickenlooper will vote in favour of same sex mariage if you ask them again.

No doubt.

Do you think the church wants the state to respect the will of the voters on Personhood?

“You all make science a laughing stock. You present science and facts just to present your viewpoint.” - Sandy Rios Family PAC

blablabla1 wrote:Is that right, Archbishop? How about we start taxing churches?

Bravo! The church needs to take care of its ecclesiastical matters and let government take care of its governmental matters. When churches and religions start paying Rome its due then they can add their input on tax matters.

blablabla1 wrote:Is that right, Archbishop? How about we start taxing churches?

Bravo! The church needs to take care of its ecclesiastical matters and let government take care of its governmental matters. When churches and religions start paying Rome its due then they can add their input on tax matters.

The governments chipping away of traditional marriage IS an ecclesiastical matter.

Imagine if other tax free organizations didn't get involved in Government like, Unions,Environmental activists organization,GLAB and LGBT organizations.

Shall we tax them too since they want their voice heard? Or do we just tax the ones we disagree with, using the power of IRS to target your enemies?

"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure."Senator Obama

What an evil nation we are becoming. Shame on the Colorado lawmkers. The end does ot jusify the means. I hope this does not come from anti consevative Chrstian bigotry Sodom had all kinds of love... Evil often comes in the name of love. "...and I saw Satan laughing with delight..." Much more than just the music has died. Sad path we are on, Thank you for hearing my views. God Bless. .

Every time the progressive income tax is manipulated to grant favor to one special interest over another someone else has to absorb the increased tax cost of the bestowed favor. In this case, and generally in every case, the single tax payer will have to pay a higher tax rate to cover for the new same sex marriage tax favor. This is not fair.

All earned income by individuals should be taxed at the same rate regardless of marital status. It’s as simple as that.

No change in law is necessary in the first place. Colorado law already requires taxpayers to use the same filing status for their state tax returns as they do for their Federal returns.

It's really the courts' job to sort things out if there is a conflict between state law and the state constitution. It seems that the proper thing to do would be to leave the filing status clause in the state tax statutes, and let someone who feels strongly enough about it file a lawsuit.

Then the legislature can take up the issue with guidance from the court. Otherwise, we'll just end up doing the whole dance again later.

By the way, Colorado doesn't offer any "marriage related" tax benefits that aren't already extended to people filing as head of household. There is also no "marriage penalty" at the state level, due to Colorado's flat income tax.

"The real division is not between conservatives and revolutionaries, but between authoritarians and libertarians"

roscoes wrote:Every time the progressive income tax is manipulated to grant favor to one special interest over another someone else has to absorb the increased tax cost of the bestowed favor. In this case, and generally in every case, the single tax payer will have to pay a higher tax rate to cover for the new same sex marriage tax favor. This is not fair.

All earned income by individuals should be taxed at the same rate regardless of marital status. It’s as simple as that.

All income in Colorado, earned or unearned, married or single, is subject to the same tax rate. 4.63%, which has been the rate since 2001. Colorado was one of the first "flat tax" states.

The Federal code is, of course, much different.

"The real division is not between conservatives and revolutionaries, but between authoritarians and libertarians"

roscoes wrote:Every time the progressive income tax is manipulated to grant favor to one special interest over another someone else has to absorb the increased tax cost of the bestowed favor. In this case, and generally in every case, the single tax payer will have to pay a higher tax rate to cover for the new same sex marriage tax favor. This is not fair.

All earned income by individuals should be taxed at the same rate regardless of marital status. It’s as simple as that.

All income in Colorado, earned or unearned, married or single, is subject to the same tax rate. 4.63%, which has been the rate since 2001. Colorado was one of the first "flat tax" states.

The Federal code is, of course, much different.

So is this a way of changing the flat rate to a progressive one while using marriage equality as the excuse?

"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure."Senator Obama

blablabla1 wrote:Is that right, Archbishop? How about we start taxing churches?

Bravo! The church needs to take care of its ecclesiastical matters and let government take care of its governmental matters. When churches and religions start paying Rome its due then they can add their input on tax matters.

The governments chipping away of traditional marriage IS an ecclesiastical matter.

Imagine if other tax free organizations didn't get involved in Government like, Unions,Environmental activists organization,GLAB and LGBT organizations.

Shall we tax them too since they want their voice heard? Or do we just tax the ones we disagree with, using the power of IRS to target your enemies?

Not all advocacy groups have tax free status. About 2/3 of the applications are denied.

Even labor unions and churches have to apply for, and be granted, tax free status. It's not automatic. Otherwise, everyone would become a church or a labor union.

Over the years, I've seen groups from one end of the political spectrum to the other have their applications denied for all sorts of reasons. The most common being that they have a hard time establishing exactly how their tax free status is going to benefit their community.

"The real division is not between conservatives and revolutionaries, but between authoritarians and libertarians"

roscoes wrote:Every time the progressive income tax is manipulated to grant favor to one special interest over another someone else has to absorb the increased tax cost of the bestowed favor. In this case, and generally in every case, the single tax payer will have to pay a higher tax rate to cover for the new same sex marriage tax favor. This is not fair.

All earned income by individuals should be taxed at the same rate regardless of marital status. It’s as simple as that.

All income in Colorado, earned or unearned, married or single, is subject to the same tax rate. 4.63%, which has been the rate since 2001. Colorado was one of the first "flat tax" states.

The Federal code is, of course, much different.

So is this a way of changing the flat rate to a progressive one while using marriage equality as the excuse?

NO! Did you not read what I wrote? All taxable income in Colorado is taxed at exactly the same rate (4.63%), regardless of filing status.

"The real division is not between conservatives and revolutionaries, but between authoritarians and libertarians"

conniesz wrote:So let's have another vote - wanna bet which side wins this time. The tide had turned and same sex mariage is pretty much an accepted norm for civilized people these days. I am positive that the state that voted for President Obama, Senator Udahl, Senator Bennet, and Governor Hickenlooper will vote in favour of same sex mariage if you ask them again.

No doubt.

Do you think the church wants the state to respect the will of the voters on Personhood?

Right. So the teachings of the Catholic Church should conform to current US legislation.

blablabla1 wrote:Is that right, Archbishop? How about we start taxing churches?

Bravo! The church needs to take care of its ecclesiastical matters and let government take care of its governmental matters. When churches and religions start paying Rome its due then they can add their input on tax matters.

No, actually the First Amendment protection isn't limited to taxpayers. Everyone has the right to add their input whether they pay taxes or not.

Aren't you glad?

Bishops don't stop being Americans when ordained. They have just as much right to speak up as you do to tell them to remain silent.

blablabla1 wrote:Is that right, Archbishop? How about we start taxing churches?

Bravo! The church needs to take care of its ecclesiastical matters and let government take care of its governmental matters. When churches and religions start paying Rome its due then they can add their input on tax matters.

The governments chipping away of traditional marriage IS an ecclesiastical matter.

Imagine if other tax free organizations didn't get involved in Government like, Unions,Environmental activists organization,GLAB and LGBT organizations.

Shall we tax them too since they want their voice heard? Or do we just tax the ones we disagree with, using the power of IRS to target your enemies?

Not all advocacy groups have tax free status. About 2/3 of the applications are denied.

Even labor unions and churches have to apply for, and be granted, tax free status. It's not automatic. Otherwise, everyone would become a church or a labor union.

Over the years, I've seen groups from one end of the political spectrum to the other have their applications denied for all sorts of reasons. The most common being that they have a hard time establishing exactly how their tax free status is going to benefit their community.

That wasn't my question. I am aware they have to apply for that status. Still should Labor unions and advocacy organizations be taxed too?

Churches are not required to file for a tax exempt status. I just here the left decry the church's tax free status all the time, yet their ok with other tax exempt organizations being able to have a voice in government. http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p1828.pdf

"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure."Senator Obama

blablabla1 wrote:Is that right, Archbishop? How about we start taxing churches?

Agreed. I'm getting sick and tired of churches getting a free ride when it comes to paying their fair share, and yet, we are supposed to pretend they have the moral high ground on matters of rights and public policy, when they so clearly do not have the moral high ground, on, well, anything.

This is not marriage-neutral. It is an attempt to chip away at the state's support for marriage and, even worse, it is being done without consulting voters.

What makes this guy think that the voters need to be consulted when it comes to rights?

Sorry, guy, rights TRUMP the mob.

So where do rights come from?

Well the Founders believed that rights are endowed by the Creator and governments are created to secure those rights. So, does God intend men to marry men? That's not obvious in observable nature so, where does the idea come from?